Friday, 2020-07-03

*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting00:01
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting00:04
*** yasufum has quit IRC00:05
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting00:06
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting00:06
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting00:13
*** jmasud has quit IRC00:36
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting00:49
*** yasufum has quit IRC01:01
*** gary_perkins has quit IRC01:02
*** diurnalist has quit IRC01:03
*** gary_perkins has joined #openstack-meeting01:04
*** mhen has quit IRC01:06
*** mhen has joined #openstack-meeting01:07
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC01:14
*** ricolin has joined #openstack-meeting01:15
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting01:15
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting01:16
*** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting01:19
*** lbragstad has quit IRC01:24
*** Liang__ has quit IRC01:28
*** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting01:29
*** eharney has quit IRC01:37
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting01:38
*** yamamoto has quit IRC01:42
*** markvoelker has quit IRC01:43
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting02:14
*** rcernin has quit IRC02:26
*** masahito has joined #openstack-meeting02:32
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting02:47
*** yasufum has quit IRC02:54
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC02:56
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting03:02
*** rcernin has quit IRC03:04
*** armax has quit IRC03:09
*** rh-jlabarre has quit IRC03:15
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting03:16
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC03:19
*** rcernin has quit IRC03:19
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting03:19
*** dklyle has quit IRC03:33
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-meeting03:33
*** yasufum has quit IRC03:35
*** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting03:36
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting03:39
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting03:40
*** masahito has quit IRC03:42
*** markvoelker has quit IRC03:43
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting03:50
*** rcernin has quit IRC03:55
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting03:56
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting04:02
*** viks____ has joined #openstack-meeting04:25
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting04:26
*** evrardjp has quit IRC04:33
*** evrardjp has joined #openstack-meeting04:33
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting04:42
*** apetrich has quit IRC04:43
*** rcernin has quit IRC04:45
*** ircuser-1 has quit IRC04:46
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting04:47
*** yasufum has quit IRC05:03
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting05:05
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting05:23
*** markvoelker has quit IRC05:27
*** diurnalist has quit IRC05:32
*** links has joined #openstack-meeting05:39
*** psahoo has quit IRC05:54
*** armax has quit IRC05:57
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting06:05
*** mnasiadka_ is now known as mnasiadka06:42
*** ykatabam has quit IRC07:09
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting07:15
*** yasufum has quit IRC07:17
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting07:17
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting07:18
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting07:18
*** tetsuro has quit IRC07:22
*** markvoelker has quit IRC07:23
*** rcernin has quit IRC07:24
*** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-meeting07:31
*** moguimar has joined #openstack-meeting07:37
*** dklyle has quit IRC07:37
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting07:40
*** psahoo has quit IRC07:43
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting07:43
*** ircuser-1 has joined #openstack-meeting07:45
*** tetsuro has quit IRC07:46
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting07:57
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting08:00
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting08:02
*** e0ne has quit IRC08:04
*** tetsuro has quit IRC08:05
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting08:09
*** priteau has joined #openstack-meeting08:14
*** bcafarel has quit IRC08:15
*** tetsuro has quit IRC08:18
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting08:19
*** psahoo has quit IRC08:31
*** tetsuro has quit IRC08:32
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting08:47
*** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting08:52
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC08:57
*** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting08:58
*** bcafarel has joined #openstack-meeting08:59
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting09:02
*** yamamoto has quit IRC09:04
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting09:04
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC09:05
*** yamamoto has quit IRC09:05
*** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting09:09
*** yasufum has quit IRC09:19
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting09:19
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting09:19
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting09:21
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC09:23
*** markvoelker has quit IRC09:24
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting09:25
*** ricolin has quit IRC09:33
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting09:43
*** yasufum has quit IRC09:45
*** ttsiouts_ has joined #openstack-meeting09:54
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC09:57
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting10:20
*** ttsiouts_ has quit IRC10:27
*** Liang__ has quit IRC10:32
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting10:35
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting10:44
*** ykatabam has quit IRC10:48
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC10:55
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting10:57
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting11:09
*** yamamoto has quit IRC11:17
*** priteau has quit IRC11:19
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting11:29
*** diurnalist has quit IRC11:33
*** ykatabam has quit IRC11:51
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting11:56
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting11:58
*** yamamoto has quit IRC12:03
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting12:04
*** yamamoto has quit IRC12:21
*** e0ne_ has joined #openstack-meeting12:25
*** e0ne has quit IRC12:25
*** JangwonLee_ has quit IRC12:27
*** hyunsikyang__ has quit IRC12:40
*** bbowen has quit IRC12:47
*** bbowen has joined #openstack-meeting12:48
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting12:52
*** moguimar has quit IRC12:53
*** yamamoto has quit IRC13:02
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC13:15
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting13:36
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting13:36
*** sluna has quit IRC13:39
*** sluna has joined #openstack-meeting13:40
*** ykatabam has quit IRC13:44
*** abhishek has joined #openstack-meeting13:44
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting13:53
*** rafaelweingartne has joined #openstack-meeting13:57
*** markvoelker has quit IRC13:58
rafaelweingartneHello guys, is this the channel where the Neutron_drivers_Meeting will take place?13:58
*** rafaelweingartne has quit IRC14:00
slaweq#startmeeting neutron_drivers14:00
openstackMeeting started Fri Jul  3 14:00:26 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is slaweq. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)"14:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'14:00
*** rafaelweingartne has joined #openstack-meeting14:00
slaweqrafaelweingartne: hi, yes we now have neutron drivers meeting14:01
rafaelweingartneAwesome, thanks.14:01
slaweqbut I'm not sure if we will have quorum today as many people in US have got holiday today14:01
rafaelweingartneI see14:01
slaweqI know that haleyb and mlavalle will not be here today14:01
amotokisorry for missing the last two meetings. I was too sleepy and felt asleep.....14:02
slaweqamotoki: np14:02
ralonsohneither njohnston I think...14:02
slaweqahh, ok14:02
slaweqso lets wait few minutes for yamamoto14:02
slaweqif he will not show up, we will not have quorum14:02
slaweqbtw. please welcome our new driver: ralonsoh :)14:03
rafaelweingartneI worked with Pedro, in the port-range extension for Neutron floating IPs, and I came here to see if you guys will have questions for us during the meeting14:03
slaweqwelcome in the team14:03
ralonsohthanks !!14:03
amotokiralonsoh: welcome :)14:03
ralonsohamotoki, thanks a lot14:03
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting14:06
slaweqI think we will have yamamoto on the meeting :)14:08
slaweqhe just joined channel14:08
slaweqok, so we have 4 of us which is quorum14:08
slaweqI think we can move on14:08
slaweq#topic RFEs14:09
*** openstack changes topic to "RFEs (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)"14:09
slaweqwe have 1 rfe for today14:09
openstackLaunchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins)14:09
slaweqand we have rafaelweingartne who is knows this rfe :)14:09
rafaelweingartneexactly, we implemented it internally on top of rocky, and now we would like to contribute back to the community14:10
*** abhishek has quit IRC14:10
slaweqmy question is: what is the real problem which You are trying to solve? is number of port forwarding entries now such big issue?14:11
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:12
rafaelweingartnewe would like to be able to create/use ranges14:12
rafaelweingartnefor instance right now (without that PR), we are only able to create NAT mappings one by one14:12
rafaelweingartnehowever, that is cumbersome if we need to map ranges14:13
rafaelweingartnesuch as all ten ports from 80-90 from a public IP to an internal IP14:13
rafaelweingartneiptables already accepts ranges, and we would just expose such feature14:14
rafaelweingartnenetwork operators are very used to this use case14:14
amotokiWhat is a real usecase of using a port range?14:14
amotokiI think it is not so common to use a consecutive range of listened ports.14:15
amotokiI might be missing something though14:15
slaweqamotoki: that is exactly what I think also14:15
slaweqthat's why I asked about real problem here14:15
rafaelweingartneI am not a network guy myself, but for instance, we already have that in PROD, and there are people using14:16
rafaelweingartneexternalizing ports by range14:16
rafaelweingartnethe network engineers came with this requirement14:16
rafaelweingartneit seems that for some use cases they have, this facilitate things14:16
rafaelweingartneI do not see a problem to be flexible with that14:17
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting14:18
rafaelweingartnefor instance, for passive FTP14:19
rafaelweingartnewe would normally use a port range14:19
amotokiwe am not necessarily against the proposal. we can do it but we just would like to know real usecase where this is needed.14:19
rafaelweingartne55536-55635, without that proposal, we would need to enter 100 API calls to open all of these ports14:19
rafaelweingartneBasically, all appliation that needs a range of ports to be open, we would need to open this range with one rule for each port, which is not ideal14:20
ralonsohI would agree with this proposal if, in case of being approved, the port range could be defined in a flexible way14:22
ralonsohfor example, "10-23,31-50,100-120"14:22
rafaelweingartneI am not sure what you mean by flexible14:22
rafaelweingartnebut that is exactly what we did14:22
rafaelweingartnean internal range, and an external range14:23
ralonsohI only saw one interval in the examples14:23
rafaelweingartneand the ranges do not need to be the same14:23
slaweqralonsoh: I'm not sure if that isn't too much14:23
rafaelweingartnethey only need to match in size14:23
ralonsohslaweq, but that's the case you were talking about14:23
ralonsohthe port ranges could not be sequential14:24
ralonsohjust my opinion14:24
rafaelweingartnewhat do you mean by that?14:24
rafaelweingartneI mean, we see a range as [x-y]14:24
rafaelweingartnewhere we take everything in between inclusing the X and Y14:25
slaweqwhat in case if e.g. user define first forwarding for range 10-20 and later he will want to remove port 15 from it and use in in different PF?14:26
slaweqwith Your proposed change it will be more complicated to do than it is now14:27
rafaelweingartnenot possible14:27
rafaelweingartneah, yes, but what is the chance of that happening?14:27
rafaelweingartneapplications normally have pre-defined ranges to work with14:28
rafaelweingartneand even if that happens, we implemented an update14:28
slaweqand also idk what is the chance that someone will need to define pf for range with e.g. 100 consequtive ports14:28
rafaelweingartneso update the first one to be 10-14,14:28
rafaelweingartnethen you use the 15 to something else14:28
rafaelweingartneand then you can create a new one between 16-2014:29
amotokirafaelweingartne: but the current FIP port forwarding API allows PUT operation.14:29
rafaelweingartnefor one-one14:29
rafaelweingartnethe whole problem is only allowing users to create NAT rule with a single port14:29
rafaelweingartneif you look at other networking solutions, whenever they deal with NAT, they allow ranges14:30
rafaelweingartneI do not see any complications to add such feature14:30
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:30
rafaelweingartneThe key here is to allow14:31
rafaelweingartnenot force users14:31
rafaelweingartneif they still want to use 1-1, that is still fine14:31
rafaelweingartnehowever, if the user wants to map a range to another range, why not allow such operation?14:31
yamamotoi used to have range configuration like that for one of my routers. i can understand it's sometimes useful.14:33
rafaelweingartneit is, our users already use in production14:33
slaweqI'm generally fine with this proposal, even if I personally don't have such usecases in mind but others may have :)14:34
rafaelweingartneI am a developer, and I see your point guys, I was also skeptical at the begining, but somehow the users do use it14:34
slaweqbut as it require API and DB schema changes, I would like to have spec for that first14:34
rafaelweingartneyou mean the pull request?14:35
rafaelweingartneor, do we need another spec just for the DB changes?14:35
ralonsohno, for the whole feature14:35
ralonsohexplaining the DB changes, API extension, etc14:35
ralonsohslaweq, pforwarding now admits to change the external and internal ports14:36
rafaelweingartneinst that what we have here
openstackLaunchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins)14:36
rafaelweingartnedo we need to list something else?14:36
slaweqrafaelweingartne: You need to propose spec with details of the change to
*** raildo_ is now known as raildo14:36
slaweqralonsoh: yes but is that problem?14:37
*** psachin has quit IRC14:37
amotokiRFE mainly discusses the need for the feature, and more discussion  on implementation around API/DB and so on happens in the spec.14:37
rafaelweingartneso besides that document we created in launch pad, we also need to write it down14:38
rafaelweingartneso, what do you need? API inputs/output, validations, new DB schema14:38
amotokiat least, in the RFE bug description, we have a room to discuss what the API and DB schema should be.14:38
rafaelweingartnesomething else?14:38
slaweqrafaelweingartne: maybe some testing plan for this new feature14:39
rafaelweingartnewe covered the code with unit tests14:39
amotokilaunchpad bug does not allows us to discuss line-by-line, so we would like to see a spec for detail. doesn't it make sense to you?14:39
rafaelweingartneI mean, all of the changes we did14:39
rafaelweingartneyes, it does14:39
rafaelweingartnedo you need some other testing plan? besides unit testing everything?14:40
slaweqok, so I'm personally ok to approve this rfe as an idea and continue discussion about api/db changes in the spec review14:40
amotokiI also dropped one small question in
openstackLaunchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins)14:40
slaweqrafaelweingartne: would be good if You could propose some tempest API/scenario tests also14:40
amotokiI am not sure N-1 port mapping works14:40
rafaelweingartnewe will do that then14:40
amotokibut this can be dsicussed in the spec if we approve it.14:41
slaweqI thought that we are talking about N-N mapping only14:42
amotokithe RFE description says "N(external port[s]) to 1 (internal port)" is allowed.14:42
slaweqwhere I missed this proposal of N-1?14:42
amotokiI don't understand how it works.14:42
slaweqamotoki: ahh, right14:42
slaweqI see it now14:42
slaweqin validations part14:42
slaweqrafaelweingartne: can You explain that?14:42
rafaelweingartneso, we can have an application listening in a single port internally, but for some reason, the user/dev/operator wants to expose it via multiple external ports. This might happen for instance, when someone starts exporting something in a port e.g. 808014:44
rafaelweingartneand then we also want port 80 to expose the same application14:44
rafaelweingartnethen we have multiple external ports that direct the traffic to the same internal application port14:45
rafaelweingartneit was used to maitain compatibility with some legacy system14:45
amotokirafaelweingartne: how does it work when an internal port starts a connection?14:46
rafaelweingartnewhat do you mean?14:46
amotokirafaelweingartne: from the nature of floating IP, both intrenal and external sides can start a connection.14:46
slaweqamotoki: is it working like that now with PF 1:1?14:47
amotokior is it okay to consider listened port case?14:47
rafaelweingartneports do not actually start connection, but applications14:47
slaweqI'm not sure14:47
amotokislaweq: I need to check more detail around iptables behavior14:48
rafaelweingartneall that the current NAT configurations do is to create iptables rules to forward packets14:48
slaweqamotoki: sure, but I think this can be discussed in the spec review14:48
rafaelweingartnethe only thing that we are doing is just making it flexible that configurations, similarly to what iptable already allows you to do.14:48
rafaelweingartnealso, they are forwarding incoming packets14:49
rafaelweingartnefrom what I remember they are not touching the outgoing packets14:49
rafaelweingartneunless, of course, the ACLs14:49
rafaelweingartnebut that is something else14:49
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting14:49
rafaelweingartneSo, to sumarise, we will propose the spect at The spec will have the context (problem description), the APIs, APIs' inputs and outputs, validations, new db schemas, and the tempest scenarios.14:51
rafaelweingartneIs that what you guys would like to see?14:51
slaweqrafaelweingartne: yes14:51
rafaelweingartneok, we will do that then14:51
slaweqamotoki: yamamoto ralonsoh any thoughts? are You ok to approve rfe?14:51
ralonsohok to approve but I have concerns about it14:52
ralonsohso we can discuss it in the spec14:52
amotokiI am okay to approve it (while I still don't know the real usecase but yamamoto says he has similar experiences)14:52
slaweqamotoki: yes, that is what convinced me too :)14:53
yamamotorange thing is fine. N-1 thing is concerning.14:53
amotokiI know the port forwarding API is mainly designed for listen ports, but if we add a forwarding rule for a higher port number theoretically it is possible for an internal side to start a connection with the port and we need to check what happens before allowing N-1 thing.14:53
amotoki(it can be discussed in the spec of course)14:54
slaweqok, so lets approve rfe as on idea of extending PF API to allow ranges14:54
slaweqand lets discuss N-1 mapping in the spec14:54
slaweqif that don't make sense we may only go with N-N mapping finally14:55
amotokisounds fine14:55
slaweqok, thx14:55
slaweqso I will mark rfe as approved14:56
slaweqthx rafaelweingartne for proposing it and work working on that14:56
slaweqand that's all what I had for You today14:56
yamamotoamotoki: my usecase was with some weird application. i think it was a game. but i don't remember details. it's long ago.14:56
amotokiyamamoto: hehe14:56
slaweqthx for attending the meeting14:57
slaweqand have a great weekend14:57
rafaelweingartneok, thanks guys14:57
yamamotogood night14:57
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"14:57
openstackMeeting ended Fri Jul  3 14:57:13 2020 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)14:57
openstackMinutes (text):
rafaelweingartnehave a nice weeked too14:57
*** rafaelweingartne has quit IRC14:59
*** armax has quit IRC15:01
*** diurnalist has quit IRC15:04
*** markmcclain has quit IRC15:06
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting15:08
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting15:15
*** jmasud has quit IRC15:25
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting15:26
*** yamamoto has quit IRC15:36
*** jiaopengju1 has quit IRC15:40
*** jiaopengju has joined #openstack-meeting15:42
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting15:54
*** markvoelker has quit IRC15:59
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting16:08
*** dosaboy has quit IRC16:12
*** icey has quit IRC16:13
*** ociuhandu_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:13
*** icey has joined #openstack-meeting16:14
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC16:16
*** links has quit IRC16:16
*** ociuhandu_ has quit IRC16:17
*** dosaboy has joined #openstack-meeting16:17
*** yamamoto has quit IRC16:20
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC16:30
*** psahoo has quit IRC17:17
*** e0ne_ has quit IRC17:21
*** ralonsoh has quit IRC17:54
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting17:55
*** markvoelker has quit IRC18:00
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting18:13
*** markvoelker has quit IRC18:17
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting18:29
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting18:43
*** diurnalist has quit IRC18:46
*** markvoelker has quit IRC18:48
*** yasufum has quit IRC18:51
*** maciejjozefczyk has quit IRC19:18
*** jmasud has quit IRC19:46
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting19:53
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting19:56
*** e0ne has quit IRC20:00
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting20:06
*** e0ne has quit IRC20:10
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC20:29
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting20:29
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting20:30
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC20:34
*** e0ne has quit IRC20:35
*** Steap has left #openstack-meeting20:40
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting20:40
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting20:44
*** markvoelker has quit IRC20:48
*** raildo has quit IRC20:54
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting20:55
*** e0ne has quit IRC21:00
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC21:03
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting21:09
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting21:19
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting21:22
*** e0ne has quit IRC21:24
*** diurnalist has quit IRC21:36
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting21:45
*** markvoelker has quit IRC21:48
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC21:50
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting21:57
*** e0ne has quit IRC22:01
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting22:32
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting22:34
*** e0ne has quit IRC22:39
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting22:46
*** armax has quit IRC22:49
*** e0ne has quit IRC22:51
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting23:10
*** e0ne has quit IRC23:15
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting23:23
*** e0ne has quit IRC23:27
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting23:35
*** andrebeltrami has quit IRC23:36
*** e0ne has quit IRC23:40
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting23:45
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting23:49
*** markvoelker has quit IRC23:53

Generated by 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!